On October 5, 2022, the Second Department issued a decision in Codrington v. Churcher, 2022 NY Slip Op. 05517, holding that to constitute a reasonable excuse for a default, law office failure must be explained in detail, explaining:
To vacate the order dated December 5, 2019, the plaintiff was required to demonstrate both a reasonable excuse for the default and the existence of a potentially meritorious opposition to the defendant’s motion for summary judgment. The determination of what constitutes a reasonable excuse lies within the Supreme Court’s discretion. The court has discretion to accept law office failure as a reasonable excuse where that claim is supported by a detailed and credible explanation of the default at issue.
The plaintiff’s undetailed, conclusory, and unsubstantiated allegations of law office failure are insufficient to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for the default in this case. In light of the foregoing, we need not consider whether the plaintiff demonstrated a potentially meritorious opposition to the defendant’s motion for summary judgment.
(Internal citations omitted).